Whether the distinction drawn within the former Section 1432(a)(3), based on marital status and the gender of his father, violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; (1) Will the distinction drawn within the former Section 1432(a)(3), based on marital status and the gender of his father violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution? : : (2)Will a Constitutional challenge as applied to Petitioner's father, as to the Second Circuit's decision in Pierre v.Holder, 738 F.3d 39(2d.Cir.2013) be abrogated by this Court's intervening decision in Morales-Santana,582 U.S. 137 S.Ct.1678(2017) ? : (3)Did the Second Circuit misapprehend the significance of Morales-Santana © in following the Pierre v.Holder holdin? (4)Does section 1432(a)(3)'s "Legal Separation" requirement as applied to Petitioner's unmarried father survive the level of intermediate security that Morales-Santana reuire? : (5)Does Section 1432(a)(3) impermissibly discriminate against unmarried parents ,and impermissibly discriminates against.unmarried fathers based on gender? . (6)Does this Petitioner prove a legal separation between his parents to the extent he proved that his father was later married to another woman for 14 years after Petitioner was born, and does Petitioner meet the standard of birth parents' "separate existences", as held by the Second Circuit in Brissett v. Ashcroft,363